Rocky21 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Why does everyone stereotype a typical Rush fan as an audio-visual club member? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big#44 Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 I like Rush ok. My problem is the ridiculous over-the-top knob-slobbering that hardcore Rush fans indulge in every time the subject comes up. No, Rush is not the greatest band in rock history. No, they are not in the top-20. No they are not particularly influential, no they are not especially groundbreaking. Peart is a very good drummer, but not the greatest of all time. Geddy is an awful excuse for a singer. They have about three memorable songs, and the rest is an enormous repotoire of endless pretentious repetive droning about Ayn Rand and satellites. I don't run to turn the radio channel when they pop up the way I do for Bob Seger, Billy Joel or REO Speedwagon, but I sure as hell don't put them anywhere NEAR the Beatles/Stones/Who/Zep/Floyd kind of pantheon, they way their fans do. :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Eric B & Rakim are about the 100th most influential hiphoppers. No, no. Take off a zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 The Spinners should have been in over 10 years ago. But how does The Beastie Boys get nominated over groups like Def Leppard and others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Lord, if ever a thread was needed to show just how subjective people are in evaluating what reflects the "best" of the rock music genre, this is it. In terms of belonging in any legitimately high-standard HOF, I think 80% of the bands mentioned are anywhere from merely not deserving of that kind of elite status (including bands I like) to outright ridiculous and eveyrwhere in-between. But that's me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejaydana Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Lord, if ever a thread was needed to show just how subjective people are in evaluating what reflects the "best" of the rock music genre, this is it. In terms of belonging in any legitimately high-standard HOF, I think 80% of the bands mentioned are anywhere from merely not deserving of that kind of elite status (including bands I like) to outright ridiculous and eveyrwhere in-between. But that's me. I think I have a different view than what I had 10 years ago about this whole rock and roll HOF deal. I'd still love to go there but ultimately this is such a subjective thing that I think all you can do is debate it away the same way you might the football HOF (in who should and shouldn't warrant inclusion). Ultimately that entire debate can't reach any satisfying conclusion because we all have different tastes I suppose but yes, even being from So Cal I cringe at the Chilli Peppers being included, they're such shameless ****s (with maybe the exception of Flea). On a related note, somebody mentioned a year or so ago that Jann Wenner plays a big part in who gets in and who doesn't. Certainly he's done just a ton for music including founding Rolling Stone magazine (which has lost its sheen but the contribution is considerable). I don't know if this assertion is true but I'd hate to have that guy being the one who decides who gets in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Wenner is co-founder of the Hall of Fame and does have a big sway in who gets in and who doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busch1724 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 The Spinners should have been in over 10 years ago. But how does The Beastie Boys get nominated over groups like Def Leppard and others? To answer The Beastie Boys were trendsetters and influential in the genre. Def Leppard happened to sell out for commercial success. Def Leppard were not pioneering in any way like the Beasties were. With that said I prefer Lep. The Beastie Boys had more of an influence on rock music than Leppard by simply fusing some rock with rap. I realize this is much more complex of a debate, but hard to do in just a few sentences. In all fairness, this should be called the Music or Popular Music Hall of Fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Screw Ohio and the R&R HoF. If you want a great time and real history, go to Memphis and check out the birth place of R&R, Sun Studios. I really want to go to the Country HoF, but not until they let ol' Hank back in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Screw Ohio and the R&R HoF. If you want a great time and real history, go to Memphis and check out the birth place of R&R, Sun Studios.I really want to go to the Country HoF, but not until they let ol' Hank back in. Hank Williams has rightly been in the Country Music Hall of Fame for years. I think you're thinking of him being banned from the Ryman Theater and the Grand Ol Opry - which is funny because he is dead. He couldn't go back there anyhow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aszumilo Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 No Neil Diamond either. Neil got in with the class of 2011 http://rockhall.com/inductees/neil-diamond/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MintHillSkinsFan Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Madonna was fun, awesome, groundbreaking and made headlines for a long time. Any Hall of Fame that didn't include her would be a joke. My point is that Madonna, like so many others in there, is in no way, shape or form, Rock and Roll. If it's the popular music hall of fame then yes, Madonna is absolutely one of the top 5 most influential people of the last 30 years. But to label Madonna's music as Rock and Roll, is the joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 The only ones on that list that deserve any consideration are Guns & Roses, Heart, and Red Hot Chili Peppers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 My point is that Madonna, like so many others in there, is in no way, shape or form, Rock and Roll. If it's the popular music hall of fame then yes, Madonna is absolutely one of the top 5 most influential people of the last 30 years. But to label Madonna's music as Rock and Roll, is the joke. Actually if you look up the origins of Rock and Roll, you'd be totally suprised on who belongs and who don't belong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Actually if you look up the origins of Rock and Roll, you'd be totally suprised on who belongs and who don't belong. I agree. I feel to many here have a modern interpretation of what is/should be considered Rock n' Roll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 there should be a fixed number of entries... in my opinion. call it 20 so, for instance if you want to add heart (whom i despise with all of the depths of my soul) then you need to justify why Heart is more worthy than at least 1 already ensrined band. but actually... if i am honest.... even then i would be bored out of my skull by the whole discussion. ---------- Post added October-3rd-2011 at 09:12 PM ---------- No Neil Diamond either. no KING Diamond, either. the travesty! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 Beasties, RHCP, G-n-R in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 :obvious: http://social.entertainment.msn.com/music/blogs/reverb-blog.aspx?feat=67445b07-292b-4f50-931f-3e9b2aad33a8 Axl Rose: I'm not coming, so don't induct meGNR singer will be a no-show at Rock and Roll Hall of Fame No surprise: Axl Rose isn't going to show up for a Guns N' Roses show. Big surprise: This time, he notified everyone in advance. Speculation has been rampant among fans whether Rose would show for Saturday's induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland -- and was even more feverish about whether he'd deign to perform with his new bandmates, his old bandmates or both. The answer: Neither. Rose released an "open letter" Wednesday in which he not only declined to attend, he asked that his name be withdrawn and not inducted, even though he's the only one out there touring under the Guns N' Roses moniker anymore. Green Day is scheduled to induct the band - Rose included anyhow - in Saturday's ceremony. *Click Link For More* Including text of full statement Gee. What a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 No RUSH. No KISS.= No credibility I swear, this is exactly how I feel. No Rush? Next to Queen, probably the best band ever, imo (and my hubby's, too). Rush was the last show we saw, the 30th Anniversary tour. Freakin' awesome!!! And the crawl on MSNBC just said that Axl Rose WILL NOT attend his induction into the HOF. I don't think anyone who's become a gazillionaire with their music, yet still has green/black/purple teeth should be awarded that honor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 Axl Rose is a completely narcissistic *******. This was done much better and much more rock 'n roll in 2006 by The Sex Pistols. http://www.uptake.com/blog/wp-content/u ... letter.jpg A couple of other things while we're on the subject. It's about time Tom Dowd was elected. Let me know when Chicago, Bad Company, Rush and Heart get in. Looking at all of the other folks that are in, these bands certainly deserve to be in as well. Oh and Kiss sucks balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Did anyone really expect Axl to show up and play with the original GnR lineup? On the flip side if he showed up with the new lineup people would crucify him. It's a no win situation for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Moseley Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Until there's a wing dedecated to Motorhead, With a 25ft. Animated Lemmey statue You can't take the RnR HOF seriously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 I think,in the spirit of the top 500 albums of all time thread,we should come up with our own Music Hall of Fame. Can put categories and such in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gracelander Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 My friend Paul was at the HOF Ceremony tonight and he was able to get autographs for me from Smokey Robinson & The Miracles. Can't wait to receive it in the mail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticksboi05 Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Axl Rose is a completely narcissistic *******. This was done much better and much more rock 'n roll in 2006 by The Sex Pistols.http://www.uptake.com/blog/wp-content/u ... letter.jpg A couple of other things while we're on the subject. It's about time Tom Dowd was elected. Let me know when Chicago, Bad Company, Rush and Heart get in. Looking at all of the other folks that are in, these bands certainly deserve to be in as well. Oh and Kiss sucks balls. Whatever, two of the most overrated bands of all-time anyway (Pistols and GnR) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.